You speak too soon. It's pretty clear to me that the economic success of nations largely depend on the quality of its talent(i.e. "Human Capital"). PISA Math scores reflect just that, the quality of Human capital in a nation. Fact of the matter is, PISA scores highly correlate with economic development. So if you measure 'Success' in economic terms, you can't afford to ignore standardized scores like PISA.

On the other hand, I don't think countries like China should gloat either over their high scores. If history has taught us anything at all, it's that social institutions are *MUCH* more important to economic success than the quality of human capital. Just look at North Korea, or China before Deng. All were horribly beaten by the west, who scored 1 standard deviation lower on the PISA math.

PISA scores and standardized tests like PISA are one important ingredient of success. But it's not the only thing that matters. If China doesn't reform to introduce more competition in its economy and insists on controlling the economy, then its economy will likewise suffer. The short-sightedness of ignoring capitalism will come around to bite them in the @$$ in the future. Command economies are never going to be as efficient at allocating resources as privatized economies. When was the last time you heard of a government agency outperforming a private company? Never. And there's a reason why. Economic success is borne out of competition. Without competition, there is no success.

There's a reason America leads. It's not because of PISA scores. It's because the social institutions in America keeps the spirit of competition alive. China has done well with Deng's reforms in the last 30 years, but the pace of economic reform is faltering, and I'm afraid the future does not bold well for China if this keeps up.

You make good points here about social institutions. The people who succeed might not always have the highest test scores (though it is a factor). Motivation, dynamics, creativity etc. cannot be overlooked. There are many variables

Group: Members
Posts: 6,433
Joined: 29-May 08
From: wind in river south

the socioeconomic gap, i think, has a lot to do with uneven infrastructure and lacking a proper institution to develop those infrastructure . then you adding india backward promotion of social hierarchy, political disunity, and religious dynamism, you widen that gap further. i expect india, in long term, to be a competitive rival, just from the resource competition standpoint alone.

the socioeconomic gap, i think, has a lot to do with uneven infrastructure and lacking a proper institution to develop those infrastructure . then you adding india backward promotion of social hierarchy, political disunity, and religious dynamism, you widen that gap further. i expect india, in long term, to be a competitive rival, just from the resource competition standpoint alone.

One of the most important infrastructures of all is people. The rest follows.

One of the most important infrastructures of all is people. The rest follows.

You say this but out of the most powerful countries, why do some with "lower IQ" and "Math test scores" outshine those with better scores?

Russia, Brazil, India come to mind. These countries are expected to outclass many of the more developed nations by 2050(they've already surpassed many IMO) and be the next superpowers along with China. These test scores to me represent a development of human capital rather than innate human capital. IQ can be boosted up 30 points by studying! Needless to say so can PISA scores.

The USA is ranked what? Between 20-30th on average IQ, and is the super power of the world. It probably will be until we're dead. China is the only nation of the projected future superpowers that has an IQ above 100 actually.

I get it though, you're trying to promote a sort of a right-wing, collectivist, isolationist nationalism for China (which I don't have a problem with). This whole "not all human, not all equal" deal you're so insistent on feeds into this. But, like I've said before insulting people on a "scientifically racial" level is very bad PR and also in most cases blatant misinformation. It will bring about more bad than good if China were to push this agenda.

You say this but out of the most powerful countries, why do some with "lower IQ" and "Math test scores" outshine those with better scores?

Russia, Brazil, India come to mind. These countries are expected to outclass many of the more developed nations by 2050(they've already surpassed many IMO) and be the next superpowers along with China. These test scores to me represent a development of human capital rather than innate human capital. IQ can be boosted up 30 points by studying! Needless to say so can PISA scores.

The USA is ranked what? Between 20-30 on average IQ, and is the super power of the world. It probably will be until we're dead. China is the only nation of the projected future superpowers that has an IQ above 100 actually.

I get it though, you're trying to promote a sort of a right-wing, collectivist, isolationist nationalism for China (which I don't have a problem with). This whole "not all human, not all equal" deal you're so insistent on feeds into this. But, like I've said before insulting people on a "scientifically racial" level is very bad PR and also in most cases blatant misinformation. It will bring about more good than bad if China were to push this agenda.

Why not be honest and say Multiculturalism is bad for China? Why burn bridges?

EDIT: Actually the "alternative right" and "conservative left" types are surprisingly similar. You'd be surprised what kind of parallel you will find between certain members of sites like "Revleft" and "Alternative Right"

EDIT: Actually the "alternative right" and "conservative left" types are surprisingly similar. You'd be surprised what kind of parallel you will find between certain members of sites like "Revleft" and "Alternative Right"

You say this but out of the most powerful countries, why do some with "lower IQ" and "Math test scores" outshine those with better scores?

Russia, Brazil, India come to mind. These countries are expected to outclass many of the more developed nations by 2050(they've already surpassed many IMO) and be the next superpowers along with China. These test scores to me represent a development of human capital rather than innate human capital. IQ can be boosted up 30 points by studying! Needless to say so can PISA scores.

The USA is ranked what? Between 20-30th on average IQ, and is the super power of the world. It probably will be until we're dead. China is the only nation of the projected future superpowers that has an IQ above 100 actually.

I get it though, you're trying to promote a sort of a right-wing, collectivist, isolationist nationalism for China (which I don't have a problem with). This whole "not all human, not all equal" deal you're so insistent on feeds into this. But, like I've said before insulting people on a "scientifically racial" level is very bad PR and also in most cases blatant misinformation. It will bring about more bad than good if China were to push this agenda.

Why do you go as far as to compare Brazil and Russia with India just to try to make India look good? maybe they score lower than China but they are still way better than India. Even though Brazil is a "brown-multicutural-country" like some here call it. You may hate the Chinese superiority complex but if you spend sometime with the Indians you might actually be surprised to find that they have the same superiority complexes, with the key difference that theirs is way less justified.I am talking about both statics like GDP per capita(Nominal), GDP per capita(PPP), human development index, population density, population growth, literacy rates, and pisa scores AND culture like dowries, bride-burning, gender-selective infanticide, and sometimes even child sacrifices (like just recently if you read the news). Brazil's economic growth is only 1 percent lower than India's while having a bigger economy, so in total numbers Brazil is still going to grow more.

So what did you mean by "Why is China not bad?" how does that not equal to "Why is China good?" (You said: Wrong)

Why would a mod intervene? Have you been trolling?

@RafaelMEconomics doesn't always directly translate to power when you mention India<Brazil. Any country with WMD available to them holds more chips at the bargaining table, if you catch my drift.

In any case, India is just the example given by the OP. I have a few Indian friends by the way, but I'm aware of those with a superiority complex.

The real underlying issue is rich"asian"kid's use of Math tests and IQ scores to imply the "innately superior human capital of China." When there is far more evidence for these tests showing "development of human capital".

EDIT: I don't mind the agenda you're trying to push, I just don't like this particular method. It "burns bridges" unnecessarily

I think maybe I have failed to get across my point--it is not that Indians don't compete--they do, just against their own egos. Imagine India as many different castes competing against each other in dharma, competing in varied forms to rid oneself of the ego, the outcome of such a thing produces what from the outside would appear to be material wealth. This is classic India, this is what produced the Vedas, Upanishads yogas, Buddhas, tantra, mathematics, surgery, complex water irrigation and farming etc etc. The reason this does not work today is because the Indian governing systems and economic modeling is based on western designs not on dharma--if it was based on dharma then the outward effect would be wealth in the way Whites and Asians understand the concept.

Let me put it this way--Europeans and Asians have no Real religion--their goals are defined by this world, so their religions reflect this world. And what is in this world but material competition? They are defined by this competition. Indians are defined by a different type of competition, not wealth/art, as this is simply one of the byproducts on the path of Moksa/liberation from the cycles of rebirth. Wealth/art is the end product in Western and Asian cultures that is why they are similar.

I think Indians would have less problems dealing with countries like China if they understood this underlying similarity--the fact that they are told repeatedly that the East adopted Prince Siddhartha's Dharma clouds what should be self evident.

On the contrary, Europeans were very religious for most of their history. Their secular culture is more of a recent phenomenon. Europeans were still religious throughout the 1800s. That of course doesn't explain why whites were still able to develop their societies back then.

However, you might be right though so I don't know. I will have to meet more average Indians to get a clearer image. Most of the Indians that I have met are the "best and brightest" of their country. In other words, the only way to understand average Indians is to live in South Asia.

I still stand with the claim that average Mexicans are very laid-back. Texas is filled with average Mexicans so I see them all the time. Mexicans are about as laid-back as Taiwan Aborigines. They aren't as dumb and lazy as people think. Mexicans just don't care enough to have ambitious goals.

So what did you mean by "Why is China not bad?" how does that not equal to "Why is China good?" (You said: Wrong)

Why would a mod intervene? Have you been trolling?

@RafaelMEconomics doesn't always directly translate to power when you mention India<Brazil. Any country with WMD available to them holds more chips at the bargaining table, if you catch my drift.

In any case, India is just the example given by the OP. I have a few Indian friends by the way, but I'm aware of those with a superiority complex.

The real underlying issue is rich"asian"kid's use of Math tests and IQ scores to imply the "innately superior human capital of China." When there is far more evidence for these tests showing "development of human capital".

EDIT: I don't mind the agenda you're trying to push, I just don't like this particular method. It "burns bridges" unnecessarily

Re-read and please, don't pretend you don't understand.

As for bringing in Rafeal, well, certainly death is equalizer. We're all equally dead eventually. Biology can be reduced to physics. But this is for you and some others too - religion has to trespass into the domain of knowledge (see how God recedes day and day when more and more can be explained?) while the same can't be said for faithful types, be it God and/or modern style of equality.

And potential ain't equal except on the blind - and by blinding faithful types?

As for bringing in Rafeal, well, certainly death is equalizer. We're all equally dead eventually. Biology can be reduced to physics. But this is for you and some others too - religion has to trespass into the domain of knowledge (see how God recedes day and day when more and more can be explained?) while the same can't be said for faithful types, be it God and/or modern style of equality.

And potential ain't equal except on the blind - and by blinding faithful types?

I understand. I just don't see how it is pertinent to this discussion in the least. "like jews and martyrdom, when is weakness not strength" = Basically: Jews and minorities appeal to morals of the majority to compensate for their disadvantage? A tediously over-complicated(like so many do when lacking substance) way of saying "playing the race card"? Stated as though it were some pearl of wisdom.

Or is being ambiguous and cryptic part of your strategy so you can go back and flip-flop again? "Blood is thicker than water" then "race is more about culture than biology"

Studying for IQ tests to boost scores, The Flynn Effect, mental plasticity etc. is common knowledge. It's not some "egalitarian lefty conspiracy", nor is it playing "the race card."

Potential? Funny, because you tried to say Chinese are so vastly intellectually superior to Vietnamese, Thai etc. When they are genetically overlapping populations. This would be like saying Swedish people are vastly intellectually superior to Irish people. Or Italians are inherently smarter than Finnish people. Now, the target is Indians. Well sir, show me a method of accurately measuring intellectual potential, not to mention the fact scientists are recognizing different forms of intellect now. Much like athletics. Show me a study accurately accounting for environmental factors. Please post the methods of this "accurate accounting of environment" for us all to see.

Speaking of science, we are all the same species. Despite your "Not all Human, Not all Equal" remark (Also very telling of what kind of "science" you study). We can however be considered different families of the same species. We are distinguishable. A more accurate statement would be "All Human, All Different" or something to that degree. ___________________________________________________Again... How was i "wrong"? You said "Why is China not bad?" how does that not equal "Why is China good?" And what does that have to do with anything? What were you trying to "bait" me into exposing?

Why would a mod intervene? Mods only intervene when someone is trolling and/or spamming. Why would this apply to you? (You imply they've been intervening on my behalf)

I understand. I just don't see how it is pertinent to this discussion in the least. "like jews and martyrdom, when is weakness not strength" = Basically: Jews and minorities appeal to morals of the majority to compensate for their disadvantage? A tediously over-complicated(like so many do when lacking substance) way of saying "playing the race card"? Stated as though it were some pearl of wisdom.

Or is being ambiguous and cryptic part of your strategy so you can go back and flip-flop again? "Blood is thicker than water" then "race is more about culture than biology"

Studying for IQ tests to boost scores, The Flynn Effect, mental plasticity etc. is common knowledge. It's not some "egalitarian lefty conspiracy", nor is it playing "the race card."

Potential? Funny, because you tried to say Chinese are so vastly intellectually superior to Vietnamese, Thai etc. When they are genetically overlapping populations. This would be like saying Swedish people are vastly intellectually superior to Irish people. Or Italians are inherently smarter than Finnish people. Now, the target is Indians. Well sir, show me a method of accurately measuring intellectual potential, not to mention the fact scientists are recognizing different forms of intellect now. Much like athletics. Show me a study accurately accounting for environmental factors. Please post the methods of this "accurate accounting of environment" for us all to see.

Speaking of science, we are all the same species. Despite your "Not all Human, Not all Equal" remark (Also very telling of what kind of "science" you study). We can however be considered different families of the same species. We are distinguishable. A more accurate statement would be "All Human, All Different" or something to that degree. ___________________________________________________Again... How was i "wrong"? You said "Why is China not bad?" how does that not equal "Why is China good?" And what does that have to do with anything? What were you trying to "bait" me into exposing?

Why would a mod intervene? Mods only intervene when someone is trolling and/or spamming. Why would this apply to you? (You imply they've been intervening on my behalf)

Thanks, doesn't this whole idea of "equality" strike you, therefore, as even more unreasonable, given what you've just told us?

Thanks, doesn't this whole idea of "equality" strike you, therefore, as even more unreasonable, given what you've just told us?

"All human, All different" implies more inequality than "Not all human, Not all Equal"? Can you please explain the logic behind that?

Anyways, sometimes silence speaks louder than words. He makes accusatory statements for me to "expose myself" by asking me "Why is China not bad?", yet can't even clarify what he means by this. So I'm left wondering if he even knows what point he was trying to make? Or rather, fool people into thinking he's making a point.

"All human, All different" implies more inequality than "Not all human, Not all Equal"? Can you please explain the logic behind that?

Anyways, sometimes silence speaks louder than words. He makes accusatory statements for me to "expose myself" by asking me "Why is China not bad?", yet can't even clarify what he means by this. So I'm left wondering if he even knows what point he was trying to make? Or rather, fool people into thinking he's making a point.

Quite simple actually: (1) China is IMO becoming more AltRight than some "Revleft" and good for her; (2) Jews as the strong have not surprisingly usurped the values of the weak as useful devices for power; (3) We're not humans first (met Frenchman and German but never man etc.)

I bet you understand the above exactly - more than many others - again I've been in your shoes before - which is why it continues to bother you. Re-read the whole exchange (and I ask others to do the same) if you or others still have doubts.

And back to the question of PISA scores where Shanghai trumps the 2 cities of India by 2+ whole standard deviations (2nd percentile - on a group basis once again): yes, this is on 'mere' knowledge level perhaps - but again if it's so unimportant, why can't you let it go. If these scores of reading, science, math in a collective sense makes no difference and are just such useless factoids, why do all countries invest so much in "education" of the young? If you don't sense their importance, why would you care in the first place?

Quite simple actually: (1) China is IMO becoming more AltRight than some "Revleft" and good for her; (2) Jews as the strong have not surprisingly usurped the values of the weak as useful devices for power; (3) We're not humans first (met Frenchman and German but never man etc.)

I bet you understand the above exactly - more than many others - again I've been in your shoes before - which is why it continues to bother you. Re-read the whole exchange (and I ask others to do the same) if you or others still have doubts.

And back to the question of PISA scores where Shanghai trumps the 2 cities of India by 2+ whole standard deviations (2nd percentile - on a group basis once again): yes, this is on 'mere' knowledge level perhaps - but again if it's so unimportant, why can't you let it go. If these scores of reading, science, math in a collective sense makes no difference and are just such useless factoids, why do all countries invest so much in "education" of the young? If you don't sense their importance, why would you care in the first place?

1) I enjoy many of the alt-right articles and find common ground with many of the posters there. You'd be surprised how many "alt righties" and "rev lefties" have nearly the same platform. Yet because of these labels, they don't realize this. I actually like Alt-Right, but I'm telling you; Scientific racism (especially citing articles with blatant data tampering, misinformation etc.) will be a hinderance to any political entity in the long run.

2) Yeah, I got that. I still stand by my assessment of it as inane rhetoric. Bringing up the Flynn Effect, IQ as a bad measure of innate intelligence, multiple types of intelligences, mental plasticity, epigenetics etc. is not playing the race card. How is "Jews as the strong have not surprisingly usurped the values of the weak as useful devices for power" relevant to the effect of environmental factors on test scores?

You invited others to go back and see, let me make it easy.

QUOTE

ME:Why not be honest and say Multiculturalism is bad for China? Why burn bridges?

EDIT: Actually the "alternative right" and "conservative left" types are surprisingly similar. You'd be surprised what kind of parallel you will find between certain members of sites like "Revleft" and "Alternative Right"

I hate to answer a question with another question but, why would I think China is bad?

HIM:Wrong: like jews and martyrdom, when is weakness not strength. Sir?

Basically showing how environment/culture can effect scores = playing the race card

Inane: lacking significance, meaning, or pointRhetoric: the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.

3) That makes more sense "We're not humans first-- before our individual backgrounds". I think sometimes clarity takes a back seat to attempted eloquence.

I care in the first place (this also doubles as why it bothers me) because you imply that these test scores are attributed fully to inherent talent when it is far from the truth. I dislike misinformants, it's no different than Afro or Eurocentrics who "claim" populations to further their agendas, spread fear and/or hate etc. India might not do as well on PISA scores but when it comes to applying math and science where it counts the most, they are right there neck and neck. Any country with "first strike capability" really.

So, sir? Is it not truly then Mathematics as the aforementioned universal language? Or rather may it be violence in reality?

1) I enjoy many of the alt-right articles and find common ground with many of the posters there. You'd be surprised how many "alt righties" and "rev lefties" have nearly the same platform. Yet because of these labels, they don't realize this. I actually like Alt-Right, but I'm telling you; Scientific racism (especially citing articles with blatant data tampering, misinformation etc.) will be a hinderance to any political entity in the long run.

2) Yeah, I got that. I still stand by my assessment of it as inane rhetoric. Bringing up the Flynn Effect, IQ as a bad measure of innate intelligence, multiple types of intelligences, mental plasticity, epigenetics etc. is not playing the race card. How is "Jews as the strong have not surprisingly usurped the values of the weak as useful devices for power" relevant to the effect of environmental factors on test scores?

You invited others to go back and see, let me make it easy.

Basically showing how environment/culture can effect scores = playing the race card

Inane: lacking significance, meaning, or pointRhetoric: the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.

3) That makes more sense "We're not humans first-- before our individual backgrounds". I think sometimes clarity takes a back seat to attempted eloquence.

I care in the first place (this also doubles as why it bothers me) because you imply that these test scores are attributed fully to inherent talent when it is far from the truth. I dislike misinformants, it's no different than Afro or Eurocentrics who "claim" populations to further their agendas, spread fear and/or hate etc. India might not do as well on PISA scores but when it comes to applying math and science where it counts the most, they are right there neck and neck. Any country with "first strike capability" really.

So, sir? Is it not truly then Mathematics as the aforementioned universal language? Or rather may it be violence in reality?

If you think about it, in the annals of human history, the greatest and most egregious crime the German National Socialists could ever ever possibly ever committed is they lost the war.

Period.

Everything else and every other ornament ever enunciated since is merely derivative - if not secondary.